A new rumor is spreading that Apple may be leveraging its ubiquity to encourage iPhone owners to participate in DNA testing, perhaps to bulk up the medical data-collecting capabilities of its ResearchKit.

The FDA's approval of the marketing of genetics-testing company 23andMe's carrier test for Bloom syndrome affirmed the rights of consumers to drive their own healthcare decisions and procedures. But it also means that it has become urgent to develop policies to regulate the rights of companies to resell data derived from the contents of our DNA and from our medical records.

"No evidence of harm" is not the same as "evidence of no harm." All studies had serious limitations that may have made the results more positive than justified, which the researchers often acknowledged.

As our scientific and medical communities forge ahead in developing new technologies and tests that may help us better understand our individual risk of disease, we should also insist that all genetic testing companies uphold the highest, patient-centered scientific and ethical standards.

This innovative approach to the management of genetic health information better balances the goals of patient health and consumer freedom. Genetic testing is the next frontier of personalized medicine. But it needs a nudge.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you necessarily should, right? I'm in one of those on-the-fence places right now because I've just gotten the results back from a DNA-testing kit that I used for my two children adopted from China.

We should be glad the FDA put a temporary stop to its marketing but we need a far broader public debate on how to ensure that consumers don't give up valuable personal data in general without being fully informed of its value and creating the option for consumers to opt out of data sharing and aggregation all together.

Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit, the FDA's action and people's eagerness to obtain their genomic information indicate the need for public education. Except for specialists in human genetics, even many doctors lack sufficient training to interpret the results of genetic tests.

In effect, the argument the FDA makes is that people are too ignorant or irresponsible to have access to information about their own body. This is the heart of the issue, and it is a troubling argument.

This week, 23andMe, the Google-backed DTC genetic test company, stunned many observers by agreeing to stop sales of its $99 genetic test kit online, saying it will now release only ancestry information and raw data without interpretation.

Today, the FDA shut down further sales of the saliva home-test kit, citing the "potential health consequences that could result from false positive or false negative assessments for high-risk indications.

Congress should consider amending the patent law to appoint ethical representatives to the PTO. Its present staff, given their alternative professional backgrounds and competing professional responsibilities, cannot reasonably be expected to account for the relevant methodology and literature.

I see personal genomics more generally evolving rapidly to become a major part of everyday life for Americans and around the globe. At the same time, potential problems associated with it will continue to emerge in parallel and merit serious evaluation.